Ready for your head to ache? It seems that two attempts to amend the Illinois Constitution are unconstitutional.

On its surface, that seems absurd. How can a change to the state’s owner’s manual fall afoul of that document? Isn’t that the point — that you’re making a change to it?

Well, it’s possible in the Land of Lincoln, but things get a little tortured in the explanation.

The efforts in question are those to impose term limits on state lawmakers and to change the hyperpartisan way legislative districts have been drawn to protect incumbents.

Lawmakers can propose changes to any part of the constitution anytime they want, passing them through both chambers and getting them on the ballot for voters to decide. But the framers of the 1970 Constitution also let citizens make similar attempts — although only under limited circumstances, dealing with the Legislature itself and confined to only “structural and procedural subjects.”

That’s because delegates at the convention wanted to ensure that “a reluctance on the part of the General Assembly to propose changes in its own domain can be overcome.”

That sounds tailor-made for both these initiatives. Entrenched lawmakers do not, as a rule, voluntarily give up power or limit how long they can stay (see: Speaker-for-Life Mike Madigan), nor do they give up any advantage — even if earned by a coin flip — to draw maps that cement their party’s control of the Legislature.

Not so, said a Cook County circuit judge Friday, citing past precedents, though in a way that seems to blow past a common-sense answer and try too hard.

Neither of us are lawyers, nor do we play them on TV. But it seems to be pretty simple to imagine both efforts changing the structure and procedures of the Legislature.

Can anyone imagine that limiting the terms of future lawmakers wouldn’t affect both? Would things go on unchanged as ever if districts weren’t drawn with an eye toward partisan advantage and if elections were made more competitive?

Moreover, there’s nothing in either of these that’s so dangerous that it can’t be talked about and decided by voters.

In an otherwise uninspiring — and uninspired — statewide campaign, these initiatives promised Illinoisans a chance to actually shake up a status quo that wasn’t working.

Can’t have that, now can we? (C.K.)

(Round) about the gas tank

Help the environment. Build a roundabout?

Page 2 of 3 - That seemed to be the philosophy of at least one person who attended a public forum last week about intersection improvements at Allen and Alta roads.

For those of you new to Peoria, traffic roundabouts seem to be a fairly controversial issue in our town. We really don’t know why. There aren’t many of the circular intersections here — three, to be exact — and they’re not in areas that handle much traffic, relatively speaking.

Some people apparently find them too confusing. But those who spoke at the Allen-Alta forum (and don’t you always think of Alan Alda and “M*A*S*H” when those two roads are mentioned? Some of us do, anyway) appeared comfortable with the concept.

Doug Ward, in particular, was passionate. And not just about roundabouts.

The Peorian said roundabouts save energy. They usually don’t feature traffic signals, which means vehicles aren’t idling while stopped for them.

“At 2 in the morning out here, do you really want to stand at a red light?” Ward said during the forum at Northwoods Community Church, located just north of the intersection.

“Think about your energy and your children and your children’s children. You don’t have to worry about foreign oil in a roundabout.”

And here City Engineer Scott Reeise was extolling only the safety aspects of roundabouts. He said there’s much less chance of getting into an accident in a roundabout than in a traditional, signaled intersection.

If roundabouts are safer and greener than other options, why not have them all over town? Well, perhaps another forum participant has a clue.

“It’s education and courtesy,” Scott Swords said about how drivers can make roundabouts work. “Driving right.”

Considering what we see on a regular basis from Peoria drivers — we’re talking about you, Mr. I-go-20-mph-in-the-left-lane-on-Knoxville Avenue — those items seem to be in woefully short supply. (N.V.)

Casey a daddy again

The Allen-Alta forum last Thursday night attracted a nice crowd, probably between 60 to 70 people. That was larger than just about every forum the city public-works department has conducted recently, save the multiple sessions regarding rebuilding the intersection of Main and University streets.

Fifth District City Councilman Casey Johnson was conspicuous by his absence. A city news release listed Johnson as a co-host of the colloquium. But he had a good excuse for not attending.

Preston Myles Johnson was born at 1:16 p.m. Thursday at OSF Saint Francis Medical Center. The second child of Johnson and his wife, Kimberleigh, weighed 8 pounds, 14 ounces at birth and was 21 inches in length.

Page 3 of 3 - All are doing fine, it appears. We extend the Johnsons our heartiest congratulations. Remember, Kimberleigh, mamas don’t let their babies grow up to be councilmen. Or reporters. (N.V.)

Chris Kaergard (C.K.) covers politics and Peoria County government for the Journal Star. He can be reached at 686-3135 or ckaergard@pjstar.com. Follow him on Twitter @ChrisKaergard. Nick Vlahos (N.V.) covers Peoria City Hall. He can be reached at 686-3285 or nvlahos@pjstar.com. Follow him on Twitter @VlahosNick. Read their blog online at www.pjstar.com/blogs/wordonweb.